I've noticed that at times not even all of the French will agree on questions of liaison as there can be regional differences.
Most of the time, liaison is more of a register matter than a regional one. But this liaison is just plain wrong and I'm not even sure I'd understand this sentence in a conversation.
"le chat [t']a pris ..." is utterly out of order. Pas de liaison entre un mot au singulier et le mot qui le suit. This a a rule. http://www.francaisfacile.com/exercices/exercice-francais-2/exercice-francais-87708.php.
Please flag it. Ta.
I think they'd have to fix the whole audio in order to get liaison right everytime, and it would be a real headache to fix it.
For instance, these two sentences can mean the exact opposite in French: J'en veux plu(s)/J'en veux pluS ("I no longer want some"/"I want more"), and yet there's no way to tell them apart when written, so it's up to the speaker to decide which makes more sense, and asking that to a bot is complicated. There's tons of examples like that, when the speaker just can't get the pronunciation of plus or tous right, or even sometimes the final consonant is pronounced when it should never be!
So, there's a good chance it's going to take time.
The liaison also sounds wrong to me. According to this site, there should never be a liaison after a singular noun:
The female audio has a liaison (incorrect). The male voice is correct (no liaison).
The link you've provided takes me to a site full of articles to assist learners of Spanish not French.
Although some yarn is made out of wool, "yarn" and "wool" are not synonymous. Some yarn is made out of cotton. "Yarn" = "Fil de tricot"
You may call it what you want. But for Duolingo, "laine" is "wool" and "fil à tricoter" is "yarn".
We will try to remember that, but you should know that Americans don't knit from a ball of wool, they knit from a ball of yarn. If someone told me stateside that a cat took some wool, I would expect to see it with a pile of unprocessed shearings.
You don't actually knit, do you? Because if someone told me, in the US where I was born/grew up/lived most of my adult life, that the cat took their wool, I would assume it was specifically wool. We don't use "wool" as the generic, but wool is, in fact, a specific thing we have heard of, including wool yarn. And knitters know what it is.
And "laine" is "wool." Some francophones use it as a generic for "yarn," just like some dialects of English call it all "wool," whether it's cotton or acrylic or wool, but "laine" means wool. Which could, in fact, mean unprocessed shearings, or carded wool, or roving... or wool that had been plied and spun into yarn.
I am a knitter, and use wool in other forms in both garments (roving in particular) and art. And I agree I was exaggerating about not knowing what that sentence meant because I have bought wool in Britain and laine in France to knit with. But I have never heard an American knitter call a ball to knit with, wool. My point was really that the British and French concepts for this are the same and can be translated literally, but American usage is different. If I was translating an article from a French knitting magazine into English, if laine was representing the source of the material, I would translate it as wool But if they were referring to the skeins being knitted with, I would use yarn.
"That cat took my yarn" should be correct. Yarn is the term used for wool in the form of a cord, for example for knitting. No one would refer to "a ball of wool" when referring to a ball of yarn, even if it was wool yarn.
(1) You don't know a lot about non-American versions of English, do you? (2) Even American fiber artists will refer to spun wool as "wool" or "wool yarn" because hey, fiber content is important.
"This cat has taken my wool" sounds very unusual in English; I would think that "This cat has taken my yarn" is better. However, my dictionary shows the English translation of "Wool" as "laine," but "yarn" is translated as "fil." I'm guessing this in simply one of those strange, meaningless sentences that turn up on Duolingo from time to time.
I don't understand the difficulty people are having with this one... Wool is a specific type of material, and it can be unprocessed (like a bunch of hair), whereas yarn can be made of lots of different materials (including wool, silk, synthetic fibers, cotton, etc), and it's woven into a thread. "Wool" and "yarn" are very different concepts.
The difficulty is that in the US a ball of material that one knits from is called yarn, while in the UK it is called wool, even if it is made entirely of acrylic or cotton or silk, or bamboo, etc.
Wow, thank you Susan, for making me aware of the common British and New Zealand usage of "wool" to refer to "yarn" made from any kind of material. Just looked it up -- I had no idea that was the case. It's flat-out wrong, of course, but since it's so widespread, maybe DL will accept the alternate translation?
Haha, yes of course, those Brits aren't very logical here, are they? Of 'course, the French see it the same way they do--"laine" means both "wool" and a "ball of yarn." I know this because I am a knitter on both sides of the Atlantic. I suspect the reason is that originally virtually all balls of knitting yarn were wool or mostly wool. When I did this exercise, the problem was that they didn't understand the American usage of yarn to mean that ball that you knit from.
First of all, read the whole thread. ALSO, as far as I can determine from this link and another (Kindle) French (not French-English) dictionary, French people also may use "wool" (laine) for yarn made of wool (or blends, or synthetics, for that matter) http://www.larousse.fr/dictionnaires/francais/laine/45949?q=laine#45883
I have read the whole thread, "Simplymeg1". I'm not normally a prescriptivist, but calling all yarn "wool" is ridiculous. You've found one dictionary that seems to confirm your claim, but every other source I've found maintains the distinction between laine and fil.
Why not? Cats like to play with things and can be mischievous at times, so you might say this if you have wool lying around that is taken by a cat as its toy.
@sean.mullen, i think it's because very few Americans have ever seen wool outside of a finished product or a ball of yarn. We are saturated with images of cats playing with a ball of yarn. You might even consider it a social mental image embedded in the American psyche. So, please everyone don't be offended. It's a short coming not worth getting upset over.